On Monday, America celebrates the life and work of the pioneering Civil Rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr. In 1964, Playboy published an interview with King with Alex Haley, who would go on to write Roots. Their discussion of the fight for racial equality is the longest interview King granted any publication. This is the second part of the interview, read the first part here. Enjoy the story in its entirety, and to read every article the magazine has ever published—from 1953 until today—visit the complete archive at iplayboy.com.

Playboy: The literature of the John Birch
Society, accusing you of just such counsels, has branded you "a conscious agent
of the Communist conspiracy."

Advertisement

King: As you know, they have sought to link
many people with communism, including the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
and a former President of the United States. So I'm in good company, at least.
The Birchers thrive on sneer and smear, on the dissemination of half-truths and
outright lies. It would be comfortable to dismiss them as the lunatic
fringe—which, by and large, they are; but some priests and ministers have also
shown themselves to be among them. They are a very dangerous group—and they
could become even more dangerous if the public doesn't reject the un-American
travesty of patriotism that they espouse.

Playboy: Was there any basis in fact for the
rumors, still circulating in some quarters, that last summer's riots were
fomented and stage-directed by Communist agitators?

Advertisement

King: I'm getting sick and tired of people
saying that this movement has been infiltrated by Communists. There are as many
Communists in this freedom movement as there are Eskimos in Florida. The FBI
provided the best answer to this absurd rumor in its report to the President
after a special investigation which he had requested. It stated that the riots
were not caused or directed by any such groups, although they did try to
capitalize upon and prolong the riots. All Negro leaders, including myself, were
most happy with the publication of these findings, for the public whisperings
had troubled us. We knew that it could prove vitally harmful to the Negro
struggle if the riots had been catalyzed or manipulated by the Communists or
some other extremist group. It would have sown the seed of doubt in the
public's mind that the Negro revolution is a genuine revolution, born from the
same womb that produces all massive social upheavals—the womb of intolerable
conditions and unendurable situations.

Playboy: Is it destined to be a violent
revolution?

King: God willing, no. But white Americans
must be made to understand the basic motives underlying Negro demonstrations.
Many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations are boiling inside the Negro,
and he must release them. It is not a threat but a fact of history that if an oppressed
people's pent-up emotions are not nonviolently released, they will be violently
released. So let the Negro march. Let him make pilgrimages to city hall. Let
him go on freedom rides. And above all, make an effort to understand why he
must do this. For if his frustration and despair are allowed to continue piling
up, millions of Negroes will seek solace and security in black-nationalist
ideologies. And this, inevitably, would lead to a frightening racial nightmare.

Sponsored

Playboy: Among whites, the best-known and most
feared of these militantly racist Negro sects is the Black Muslims. What is
your estimation of its power and influence among the Negro masses?

King: Except in a few metropolitan ghettos,
my experience has been that few Negroes have any interest at all in this
organization, much less give any allegiance to its pessimistic doctrines. The
Black Muslims are a quasi-religious, sociopolitical movement that has appealed
to some Negroes who formerly were Christians. For the first time, the Negro was
presented with a choice of a religion other than Christianity. What this appeal
actually represented was an indictment of Christian failures to live up to
Christianity's precepts; for there is nothing in Christianity, nor in the
Bible, that justifies racial segregation. But when the Negroes' genuine
fighting spirit rose during 1963, the appeal of the Muslims began to diminish.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: One of the basic precepts of black
nationalism has been the attempt to engender a sense of communion between the
American Negro and his African "brother," a sense of identity between the
emergence of black Africa and the Negro's struggle for freedom in America. Do
you feel that this is a constructive effort?

King: Yes, I do, in many ways. There is a
distinct, significant and inevitable correlation. The Negro across America,
looking at his television set, sees black statesmen voting in the United
Nations on vital world issues, knowing that in many of America's cities, he
himself is not yet permitted to place his ballot. The Negro hears of black
kings and potentates ruling in palaces, while he remains ghettoized in urban
slums. It is only natural that Negroes would react to this extreme irony.
Consciously or unconsciously, the American Negro has been caught up by the
black Zeitgeist. He feels a deepening sense of identification with his
black African brothers, and with his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South
America and the Caribbean. With them he is moving with a sense of increasing
urgency toward the promised land of racial justice.

Playboy: Do you feel that the African nations,
in turn, should involve themselves more actively in American Negro affairs?

Advertisement

King: I do indeed. The world is now so
small in terms of geographic proximity and mutual problems that no nation
should stand idly by and watch another's plight. I think that in every possible
instance Africans should use the influence of their governments to make it
clear that the struggle of their brothers in the U.S. is part of a world-wide
struggle. In short, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, for
we are tied together in a garment of mutuality. What happens in Johannesburg
affects Birmingham, however indirectly. We are descendants of the Africans. Our
heritage is Africa. We should never seek to break the ties, nor should the
Africans.

Playboy: One of the most articulate champions
of black Afro-American brotherhood has been Malcolm X, the former Black Muslim
leader who recently renounced his racist past and converted to orthodox
Mohammedanism. What is your opinion of him and his career?

King: I met Malcolm X once in Washington,
but circumstances didn't enable me to talk with him for more than a minute. He
is very articulate, as you say, but I totally disagree with many of his
political and philosophical views—at least insofar as I understand where he now
stands. I don't want to seem to sound self-righteous, or absolutist, or that I
think I have the only truth, the only way. Maybe he does
have some of the answer. I don't know how he feels now, but I know that I have
often wished that he would talk less of violence, because violence is not going
to solve our problem. And in his litany of articulating the despair of the
Negro without offering any positive, creative alternative, I feel that Malcolm
has done himself and our people a great disservice. Fiery, demagogic oratory in
the black ghettos, urging Negroes to arm themselves and prepare to engage in
violence, as he has done, can reap nothing but grief.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: For them or for whites?

King: For everyone, but mostly for them.
Even the extremist leaders who preach revolution are invariably unwilling to
lead what they know would certainly end in bloody, chaotic and total defeat;
for in the event of a violent revolution, we would be sorely outnumbered. And
when it was all over, the Negro would face the same unchanged conditions, the
same squalor and deprivation—the only difference being that his bitterness
would be even more intense, his disenchantment even more abject. Thus, in
purely practical as well as moral terms, the American Negro has no rational
alternative to nonviolence.

Playboy: You categorically reject violence as
a tactical technique for social change. Can it not be argued, however, that
violence, historically, has effected massive and sometimes constructive social
change in some countries?

Advertisement

King: I'd be the first to say that some
historical victories have been won by violence; the U.S. Revolution is
certainly one of the foremost. But the Negro revolution is seeking integration,
not independence. Those fighting for independence have the purpose to drive out the oppressors. But here in America, we've got to live together. We've
got to find a way to reconcile ourselves to living in community, one group with
the other. The struggle of the Negro in America, to be successful, must be
waged with resolute efforts, but efforts that are kept strictly within the
framework of our democratic society. This means reaching, educating and moving
large enough groups of people of both races to stir the conscience of the
nation.

Playboy: How do you propose to go about it?

King: Before we can make any progress, we
must avoid retrogression—by doing everything in our power to avert further
racial violence. To this end, there are three immediate steps that I would
recommend. Firstly, it is mandatory that people of good will across America,
particularly those who are in positions to wield influence and power, conduct
honest, soul-searching analyses and evaluations of the environmental causes
that spawn riots. All major industrial and ghetto areas should establish
serious biracial discussions of community problems, and of ways to begin
solving them. Instead of ambulance service, municipal leaders need to provide
preventive medicine. Secondly, these communities should make serious efforts to
provide work and training for unemployed youth, through job-and-training
programs such as the HARYOU-ACT program in New York City. Thirdly, all cities
concerned should make first-priority efforts to provide immediate quality
education for Negro youth—instead of conducting studies for the next five
years. Young boys and girls now in the ghettos must be enabled to feel that
they count, that somebody cares about them; they must be able to feel hope.
And on a longer-range basis, the physical ghetto itself must be eliminated,
because these are the environmental conditions that germinate riots. It is both
socially and morally suicidal to continue a pattern of deploring effects while
failing to come to grips with the causes. Ultimately, law and order will be
maintained only when justice and dignity are accorded impartially to all.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: Along with the other civil rights
leaders, you have often proposed a massive program of economic aid, financed by
the Federal Government, to improve the lot of the nation's 20,000,000 Negroes.
Just one of the projects you've mentioned, however—the HARYOU-ACT program to
provide jobs for Negro youths—is expected to cost $141,000,000 over the next
ten years, and that includes only Harlem. A nationwide program such as you
propose would undoubtedly run into the billions.

King: About 50 billion, actually—which is
less than one year of our present defense spending. It is my belief that with
the expenditure of this amount, over a ten-year period, a genuine and dramatic
transformation could be achieved in the conditions of Negro life in America. I
am positive, moreover, that the money spent would be more than amply justified
by the benefits that would accrue to the nation through a spectacular decline
in school dropouts, family breakups, crime rates, illegitimacy, swollen relief
rolls, rioting and other social evils.

Playboy: Do you think it's realistic to hope
that the Government would consider an appropriation of such magnitude other
than for national defense?

Advertisement

King: I certainly do. This country has the
resources to solve any problem once that problem is accepted
as national policy. An example is aid to Appalachia, which has been made a
policy of the Federal Government's much-touted war on poverty; one billion was
proposed for its relief—without making the slightest dent in the defense
budget. Another example is the fact that after World War Two, during the years
when it became policy to build and maintain the largest military machine the
world has ever known, America also took upon itself, through the Marshall Plan
and other measures, the financial relief and rehabilitation of millions of
European people. If America can afford to underwrite its allies and ex-enemies,
it can certainly afford—and has a much greater obligation, as I see it—to do at
least as well by its own no-less-needy countrymen.

Playboy: Do you feel it's fair to request a
multibillion-dollar program of preferential treatment for the Negro, or for any
other minority group?

King: I do indeed. Can any fair-minded
citizen deny that the Negro has been deprived? Few people reflect that for two
centuries the Negro was enslaved, and robbed of any
wages—potential accrued wealth which would have been the legacy of his descendants.
All of America's wealth today could not adequately compensate
its Negroes for his centuries of exploitation and humiliation. It is an
economic fact that a program such as I propose would certainly cost far less
than any computation of two centuries of unpaid wages plus accumulated
interest. In any case, I do not intend that this program of economic aid should
apply only to the Negro; it should benefit the disadvantaged of all
races.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Within common law, we have ample precedents for special
compensatory programs, which are regarded as settlements. American Indians are
still being paid for land in a settlement manner. Is not two centuries of
labor, which helped to build this country, as real a commodity? Many other
easily applicable precedents are readily at hand: our child labor laws, social
security, unemployment compensation, man-power retraining programs. And you
will remember that America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions
of veterans after the War—a program which cost far more than a policy of
preferential treatment to rehabilitate the traditionally disadvantaged Negro
would cost today.

The closest analogy is the GI Bill of Rights. Negro
rehabilitation in America would require approximately the same breadth of
program—which would not place an undue burden on our economy. Just as was the
case with the returning soldier, such a bill for the disadvantaged and
impoverished could enable them to buy homes without cash, at lower and easier
repayment terms. They could negotiate loans from banks to launch businesses.
They could receive, as did ex-GIs, special points to place them ahead in
competition for civil service jobs. Under certain circumstances of physical
disability, medical care and long-term financial grants could be made
available. And together with these rights, a favorable social climate could be
created to encourage the preferential employment of the disadvantaged, as was the case
for so many years with veterans. During those years, it might be noted, there
was no appreciable resentment of the preferential treatment being given to the
special group. America was only compensating her veterans for their time lost
from school or from business.

Playboy: If a nationwide program of
preferential employment for Negroes were to be adopted, how would you propose
to assuage the resentment of whites who already feel that their jobs are being
jeopardized by the influx of Negroes resulting from desegregation?

Advertisement

King: We must develop a Federal program of
public works, retraining and jobs for all—so that none, white or black, will
have cause to feel threatened. At the present time, thousands of jobs a week
are disappearing in the wake of automation and other production efficiency techniques.
Black and white, we will all be harmed unless something grand and
imaginative is done. The unemployed, poverty-stricken white man must be made to
realize that he is in the very same boat with the Negro. Together, they could
exert massive pressure on the Government to get jobs for all. Together, they
could form a grand alliance. Together, they could merge all people for the good
of all.

Playboy: If Negroes are also granted
preferential treatment in housing, as you propose, how would you allay the alarm
with which many white homeowners, fearing property devaluation, greet the
arrival of Negroes in hitherto all white neighborhoods?

King: We must expunge from our society the
myths and half-truths that engender such groundless fears as these. In the first
place, there is no truth to the myth that Negroes depreciate property. The fact
is that most Negroes are kept out of residential neighborhoods so long that
when one of us is finally sold a home, it's already depreciated. In the second place, we
must dispel the negative and harmful atmosphere that has been created by
avaricious and unprincipled realtors who engage in "blockbusting." If we had in
America really serious efforts to break down discrimination in housing, and at
the same time a concerted program of Government aid to improve housing for
Negroes, I think that many white people would be surprised at how many Negroes
would choose to live among themselves, exactly as Poles and Jews and other
ethnic groups do.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: The B'nai B'rith, a prominent social-action
organization which undertakes on behalf of the Jewish people many of the
activities that you ask the Government to perform for Negroes, is generously
financed by Jewish charities and private donations. All of the Negro civil
rights groups, on the other hand—including your own—are perennially in
financial straits and must rely heavily on white philanthropy in order to
remain solvent. Why do they receive so little support from Negroes?

King: We have to face and live with the
fact that the Negro has not developed a sense of stewardship. Slavery was so
divisive and brutal, so molded to break up unity, that we never developed a
sense of oneness, as in Judaism. Starting with the individual family unit, the
Jewish people are closely knit into what is, in effect, one big family. But
with the Negro, slavery separated families from families, and the pattern of
disunity that we see among Negroes today derives directly from this cruel fact
of history. It is also a cruel fact that the Negro, generally speaking, has not
developed a responsible sense of financial values. The best economists say that
your automobile shouldn't cost more than half of your annual income, but we see
many Negroes earning $7000 a year paying $5000 for a car. The home, it is said,
should not cost more than twice the annual income, but we see many Negroes
earning, say, $8000 a year living in a $30,000 home. Negroes, who amount to
about 11 percent of the American population, are reported to consume over 40
percent of the Scotch whisky imported into the U.S., and to spend over
$72,000,000 a year in jewelry stores. So when we come asking for civil rights
donations, or help for the United Negro College Fund, most Negroes are trying
to make ends meet.

Playboy: The widespread looting that took place
during last summer's riots would seem to prove your point. Do you agree with
those who feel that this looting—much of which was directed against
Jewish-owned stores—was anti-Semitic in motivation?

Advertisement

King: No, I do not believe that the riots
could in any way be considered expressions of anti-Semitism. It's true, as I
was particularly pained to learn, that a large percentage of the looted stores
were owned by our Jewish friends, but I do not feel that anti-Semitism was
involved. A high percentage of the merchants serving most Negro communities
simply happen to be Jewish. How could there be anti-Semitism among Negroes when
our Jewish friends have demonstrated their commitment to the principle of
tolerance and brotherhood not only in the form of sizable contributions, but in
many other tangible ways, and often at great personal sacrifice? Can we ever
express our appreciation to the rabbis who chose to give moral witness with us
in St. Augustine during our recent protest against segregation in that unhappy
city? Need I remind anyone of the awful beating suffered by Rabbi Arthur
Lelyveld of Cleveland when he joined the civil rights workers there in
Hattiesburg, Mississippi? And who can ever forget the sacrifice of two Jewish
lives, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, in the swamps of Mississippi? It
would be impossible to record the contribution that the Jewish people have made
toward the Negro's struggle for freedom—it has been so great.

Playboy: In conspicuous contrast, according to
a recent poll conducted by Ebony, only one Negro in ten has ever
participated physically in any form of social protest. Why?

King: It is not always sheer numbers that
are the measure of public support. As I see it, every Negro who does
participate represents the sympathy and the moral backing of thousands of
others. Let us never forget how one photograph, of those Birmingham policemen
with their knees on that Negro woman on the ground, touched something
emotionally deep in most Negroes in America, no matter who they were. In city
after city, where S.C.L.C. has helped to achieve sweeping social changes, it
has been not only because of the quality of its members' dedication and
discipline, but because of the moral support of many Negroes who never took an
active part. It's significant, I think, that during each of our city struggles,
the usual average of crimes committed by Negroes has dropped to almost nothing.

Advertisement

Advertisement

But it is true, undeniably, that there are many Negroes who
will never fight for freedom—yet who will be eager enough to accept it
when it comes. And there are millions of Negroes who have never known anything
but oppression, who are so devoid of pride and self-respect that they have
resigned themselves to segregation. Other Negroes, comfortable and complacent,
consider that they are above the struggle of the masses. And still
others seek personal profit from segregation.

Playboy: Many Southern whites have accused you of
being among those who exploit the race problem for private gain. You are widely
believed throughout the South, in fact, to have amassed a vast personal fortune
in the course of your civil rights activities.

King: Me
wealthy? This is so utterly fallacious and erroneous that I often wonder where
it got started. For the sixth straight year since I have been S.C.L.C.'s
president, I have rejected our board's insistent recommendation that I accept
some salary beyond the one dollar a year which I receive, which entitles me to
participate in our employees' group insurance plan. I have rejected also our
board's offer of financial gifts as a measure and expression of appreciation.
My only salary is from my church, $4000 a year, plus $2000 more a year for what
is known as "pastoral care." To earn a grand total of about $10,000 a year, I
keep about $4000 to $5000 a year for myself from the honorariums that I receive
from various speaking engagements. About 90 percent of my speaking is for
S.C.L.C., and it brings into our treasury something around $200,000 a year,
Additionally, I get a fairly sizable but fluctuating income in the form of
royalties from my writings. But all of this, too, I give to my church, or to my
alma mater, Morehouse College, here in Atlanta.

Advertisement

I believe as sincerely as I believe anything that the
struggle for freedom in which S.C.L.C. is engaged is not one that should reward
any participant with individual wealth and gain. I think I'd rise up in my
grave if I died leaving two or three hundred thousand dollars. But people just
don't seem to believe that this is the way I feel about it. If I have any
weaknesses, they are not in the area of coveting wealth. My wife knows this
well; in fact, she feels that I overdo it. But the Internal Revenue people,
they stay on me; they feel sure that one day they are going to find a fortune
stashed in a mattress. To give you some idea of my reputed affluence, just last
week I came in from a trip and learned that a television program had announced
I was going to purchase an expensive home in an all-white neighborhood here in
Atlanta. It was news to me!

Playboy: Your schedule of speaking engagements
and civil rights commitments throughout the country is a punishing one—often 20
hours a day, seven days a week, according to reports. How much time do you get
to spend at home?

King: Very little, indeed. I've averaged
not more than two days a week at home here in Atlanta over the past year—or
since Birmingham, actually. I'm away two and three weeks at a time, mostly
working in communities across the South. Wherever I am, I try to be in a pulpit
as many Sundays as possible. But every day when I'm at home, I break from the
office for dinner and try to spend a few hours with the children before I
return to the office for some night work. And on Tuesdays when I'm not out of
town, I don't go to the office. I keep this for my quiet day of reading and
silence and meditation, and an entire evening with Mrs. King and the children.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: If you could have a week's
uninterrupted rest with no commitments whatever, how would you spend it?

King: It's difficult to imagine such a
thing, but if I had the luxury of an entire week, I would spend it meditating
and reading, refreshing myself spiritually and intellectually. I have a deep
nostalgia for the periods in the past that I was able to devote in this manner.
Amidst the struggle, amidst the frustrations, amidst the endless work, I often
reflect that I am forever giving—never pausing to take in. I feel
urgently the need for even an hour of time to get away, to withdraw, to refuel.
I need more time to think through what is being done, to take time out from the
mechanics of the movement, to reflect on the meaning of the movement.

Playboy: If you were marooned on the
proverbial desert island, and could have with you only one book—apart from the
Bible—what would it be?

Advertisement

King: That's tough. Let me think about
it—one book, not the Bible. Well, I think I would have to pick Plato's Republic. I feel that it brings together more of the insights of history than any
other book. There is not a creative idea extant that is not discussed, in some
way, in this work. Whatever realm of theology or philosophy is one's
interest—and I am deeply interested in both—somewhere along the way, in this
book, you will find the matter explored.

Playboy: If you could send someone—anyone—to
that desert island in your stead, who would it be?

King: That's another tough one. Let me see,
I guess I wouldn't mind seeing Mr. Goldwater dispatched to a desert island. I
hope they'd feed him and everything, of course. I am
nonviolent, you know. Politically, though, he's already on a desert island, so
it may be unnecessary to send him there.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: We take it you weren't overly
distressed by his defeat in the Presidential race.

King: Until that defeat, Goldwater was the
most dangerous man in America. He talked soft and nice, but he gave aid and
comfort to the most vicious racists and the most extreme rightists in America.
He gave respectability to views totally alien to the democratic process. Had he
won, he would have led us down a fantastic path that would have totally
destroyed America as we know it.

Playboy: Until his withdrawal from the race
following Goldwater's nomination. Alabama's Governor Wallace was another
candidate for the Presidency. What's your opinion of his
qualifications for that office?

Advertisement

King: Governor Wallace is a demagog with a
capital D. He symbolizes in this country many of the evils that were alive in
Hitler's Germany. He is a merchant of racism, peddling hate under the guise of
States' rights. He wants to turn back the clock, for his own personal
aggrandizement, and he will do literally anything to accomplish this. He represents the
misuse, the corruption, the destruction of leadership. I am not sure that he
believes all the poison that he preaches, but he is artful enough to convince
others that he does. Instead of guiding people to new peaks of reasonableness,
he intensifies misunderstanding, deepens suspicion and prejudice. He is perhaps
the most dangerous racist in America today.

Playboy: One of the most controversial issues
of the past year, apart from civil rights, was the question of school prayer,
which has been ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court. Governor Wallace, among
others, has denounced the decision. How do you feel about it?

King: I endorse it. I think it was correct.
Contrary to what many have said, it sought to outlaw neither prayer nor belief
in God. In a pluralistic society such as ours, who is to determine what prayer
shall be spoken, and by whom? Legally, constitutionally or otherwise, the state
certainly has no such right. I am strongly opposed to the efforts that have
been made to nullify the decision. They have been motivated, I think, by little
more than the wish to embarrass the Supreme Court. When I saw Brother Wallace
going up to Washington to testify against the decision at the Congressional
hearings, it only strengthened my conviction that the decision was right.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playboy: Governor Wallace has intimated that
President Johnson, in championing the cause of civil rights only since he
became Vice-President, may be guilty of "insincerity."

King: How President Johnson may or may not
have felt about or voted on civil rights during his years in Congress is less
relevant, at this point, than what he has said and done about it during his
tenure as President of the United States. In my opinion, he has done a good job
up to now. He is an extremely keen political man, and he has demonstrated his wisdom
and his commitment in forthrightly coming to grips with the problem. He does
not tire of reminding the nation of the moral issues involved. My impression is
that he will remain a strong President for civil rights.

Playboy: Late in 1963, you wrote, "As I look
toward 1964, one fact is unmistakably clear: The thrust of the Negro toward
full emancipation will increase rather than decrease." As last
summer's riots testified, these words were unhappily prophetic. Do you foresee
more violence in the year ahead?

Advertisement

King: To the degree that the Negro is not
thwarted in his thrust forward, I believe that one can predict less violence. I
am not saving that there will be no demonstrations. There assuredly will, for
the Negro in America has not made one civil rights gain without tense legal and
extralegal pressure. If the Constitution were today applied equally and
impartially to all of America's citizens, in every section of the country, in
every court and code of law, there would be no need for any group of citizens to
seek extralegal redress.

Our task has been a difficult one, and will continue to be,
for privileged groups, historically, have not volunteered to give up their
privileges. As Reinhold Niebuhr has written, individuals may see the moral
light and voluntarily abandon their unjust posture, but groups tend to be more
immoral, and more intransigent, than individuals. Our nonviolent direct-action
program, therefore—which has proved its strength and effectiveness in more than
a thousand American cities where some baptism of fire has taken place—will
continue to dramatize and demonstrate against local injustices to the Negro
until the last of those who impose those injustices are forced to negotiate:
until, finally, the Negro wins the protections of the Constitution that have
been denied to him; until society, at long last, is stricken gloriously and
incurably color-blind.

Playboy: In well-earned recognition of your
dedication to and leadership of the struggle to achieve these goals, you
became, in October of last year, the youngest man ever to receive the Nobel
Peace Prize. What was your reaction to the news?

Advertisement

Advertisement

King: It made me feel very humble indeed.
But I would like to think that the award is not a personal tribute, but a
tribute to the entire freedom movement, and to the gallant people of both races
who surround me in the drive for civil rights which will make the American
dream a reality. I think that this internationally known award will call even
more attention to our struggle, gain even greater sympathy and understanding
for our cause, from people all over the world. I like to think that the award
recognizes symbolically the gallantry, the courage and the amazing discipline
of the Negro in America, for these things are to his eternal credit. Though we
have had riots, the bloodshed that we would have known without the discipline
of nonviolence would have been truly frightening. I know that many whites feel
the civil rights movement is getting out of hand; this may reassure them. It
may let them see that basically this is a disciplined struggle, let them
appreciate the meaning of our struggle, let them see that a
great struggle for human freedom can occur within the framework of a democratic
society.

Playboy: Do you feel that this goal will be
achieved within your lifetime?

King: I confess that I do not believe this
day is around the corner. The concept of supremacy is so imbedded in the white
society that it will take many years for color to cease to be a judgmental
factor. But it is certainly my hope and dream. Indeed, it is the keystone of my
faith in the future that we will someday achieve a thoroughly integrated
society. I believe that before the turn of the century, if trends continue to
move and develop as presently, we will have moved a long, long way toward such
a society.

Advertisement

Playboy: Do you intend to dedicate the rest of
your life, then, to the Negro cause?

King: If need be, yes. But I dream of the
day when the demands presently cast upon me will be greatly diminished. I would
say that in the next five years, though, I can't hope for much letup—either in
the South or in the North. After that time, it is my hope that things will
taper off a bit.

Playboy: If they do, what are your plans?

Advertisement

Advertisement

King: Well, at one time I dreamed of
pastoring for a few years, and then of going to a university to teach theology.
But I gave that up when I became deeply involved in the civil rights struggle.
Perhaps, in five years or so, if the demands on me have lightened, I will have
the chance to make that dream come true.

Playboy: In the meanwhile, you are now the
universally acknowledged leader of the American civil rights movement, and chief
spokesman for the nation's 20,000,000 Negroes. Are there ever moments when you
feel awed by this burden of responsibility, or inadequate to its demands?

King: One cannot be in my position, looked
to by some for guidance, without being constantly reminded of the awesomeness
of its responsibility. I live with one deep concern: Am I making the right
decisions? Sometimes I am uncertain, and I must look to God for guidance. There
was one morning I recall, when I was in the Birmingham jail, in solitary, with
not even my lawyers permitted to visit, and I was in a nightmare of despair.
The very future of our movement hung in the balance, depending upon capricious
turns of events over which I could have no control there, incommunicado, in an
utterly dark dungeon. This was about ten days after our Birmingham
demonstrations began. Over 400 of our followers had gone to jail; some had been
bailed out, but we had used up all of our money for bail, and about 300
remained in jail, and I felt personally responsible. It was then that President
Kennedy telephoned my wife, Coretta. After that, my jail conditions were
relaxed, and the following Sunday afternoon—it was Easter Sunday—two S.C.L.C.
attorneys were permitted to visit me. The next day, word came to me from New
York that Harry Belafonte had raised $50,000 that was available immediately for
bail bonds, and if more was needed, he would raise that. I cannot express what
I felt, but I knew at that moment that God's presence had never left me, that
He had been with me there in solitary.

Advertisement

I subject myself to self-purification and to endless
self-analysis; I question and soul-search constantly into myself to be as
certain as I can that I am fulfilling the true meaning of my work, that I am
maintaining my sense of purpose, that I am holding fast to my ideals, that I am
guiding my people in the right direction. But whatever my doubts, however heavy
the burden, I feel that I must accept the task of helping to make this nation
and this world a better place to live in—for all men, black and white alike.

I never will forget a moment in Birmingham when a white
policeman accosted a little Negro girl, seven or eight years old, who was
walking in a demonstration with her mother. "What do you want?" the policeman
asked her gruffly, and the little girl looked him straight in the eye and
answered, "Fee-dom." She couldn't even pronounce it, but she knew. It was
beautiful! Many times when I have been in sorely trying situations, the memory
of that little one has come into my mind, and has buoyed me.

Similarly, not long ago, I toured in eight
communities of the state of Mississippi. And I have carried with me ever since
a visual image of the penniless and the unlettered, and of the expressions on
their faces—of deep and courageous determination to cast off the imprint of the
past and become free people. I welcome the opportunity to be a part of this
great drama, for it is a drama that will determine America's destiny. If the
problem is not solved, America will be on the road to its self-destruction. But
if it is
solved, America will just as surely be on the high road to the fulfillment of
the founding fathers' dream, when they wrote: "We hold these truths to be self
evident.…"